How do sustainability reports from the Nordic and the Mediterranean European countries compare

  • Manuel Castelo Branco
  • Catarina Delgado
  • Carla Marques
Original Paper
  • 157 Downloads

Abstract

This study investigates the sustainability reporting practices of companies based in the Nordic and the Mediterranean European countries for the period 2013–2015. Its purpose is to analyse to what extent, if any, are there differences in these practices. It seeks to capture the influence of national institutions and firm specific characteristics in sustainability reporting. Non-parametric statistics are used to analyse some factors which influence disclosure, namely country, industry affiliation, type of property, listing status and size. In accordance with the theoretical frame used, that of the varieties of capitalism approach, findings suggest that in general companies from Mediterranean European countries present higher levels of engagement with the Global Reporting Initiative.

Keywords

Mediterranean countries Nordic countries Sustainability reporting 

JEL Classification

M4 M14 

References

  1. Albareda L, Lozano JM, Ysa T (2007) Public policies on corporate social responsibility: the role of governments in Europe. J Bus Ethics 74(4):391–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andersen TM, Holmström B, Honkapohja S, Korkman S, Söderström HT, Varttia P (2007) The Nordic model. The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy, HelsinkiGoogle Scholar
  3. Barkemeyer R, Preuss L, Lee L (2015) On the effectiveness of private transnational governance regimes—evaluating corporate sustainability reporting according to the Global Reporting Initiative. J World Bus 50:312–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Benner M (2003) The Scandinavian challenge. The future of advanced welfare states in the knowledge economy. Acta Sociol 46(2):132–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blomquist S, Moene K (2015) The Nordic model. J Public Econ 127:1–2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Branco MC, Delgado C, Sá M, Sousa C (2014) Comparing CSR communication on corporate websites in Sweden and Spain. Balt J Manag 9(2):231–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carson SG, Hagen Ø, Sethi SP (2015) From implicit to explicit CSR in a Scandinavian context: the cases of HA G and Hydro. J Bus Ethics 127:17–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chen S, Bouvain P (2009) Is corporate responsibility converging? A comparison of corporate responsibility reporting in the USA, UK, Australia, and Germany. J Bus Ethics 87:299–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dupuy C, Lavigne S, Nicet-Chenaf D (2010) Does geography still matter? Evidence on the portfolio turnover of large equity investors and varieties of capitalism. Econ Geogr 86:75–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ehnert I, Parsa S, Roper I, Wagner M, Muller-Camen M (2016) Reporting on sustainability and HRM: a comparative study of sustainability reporting practices by the world’s largest companies. Int J Human Resour Manag 27(1):88–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Eleftheriadis IM, Anagnostopoulou EG (2015) Relationship between corporate climate change disclosures and firm factors. Bus Strateg Environ 24:780–789CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Favotto A, Kollman K, Bernhagen P (2016) Engaging firms: the global organisational field for corporate social responsibility and national varieties of capitalism. Policy Soc 35:13–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fifka MS (2013) Corporate responsibility reporting and its determinants in comparative perspective—a review of the empirical literature and a meta-analysis. Bus Strateg Environ 22:1–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fifka MS, Drabble M (2012) Focus and standardization of sustainability reporting—a comparative study of the United Kingdom and Finland. Bus Strateg Environ 21:455–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fochesato M, Bowles S (2015) ‘Nordic exceptionalism?’ Social democratic egalitarianism in world-historic perspective. J Public Econ 127:30–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gambarotto F, Solari S (2015) The peripheralization of Southern European capitalism within the EMU. Rev Int Polit Econ 22(4):788–812CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gamerschlag R, Klaus M, Verbeeten F (2011) Determinants of voluntary CSR disclosure: empirical evidence from Germany. Rev Manag Sci 5:233–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. García-Benau MA, Sierra-Garcia L, Zorio-Grima A (2012) La verificación de la memoria de sostenibilidad en un contexto europeo. GCG Georget Univ Univ 6(2):66–80Google Scholar
  19. Gjølberg M (2009a) Measuring the immeasurable? Constructing an index of CSR practices and CSR performance in 20 countries. Scand J Manag 25:10–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gjølberg M (2009b) The origin of corporate social responsibility: global forces or national legacies? Socio-Econ Rev 7(4):605–637CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gjølberg M (2010) Varieties of corporate social responsibility (CSR): CSR meets the “Nordic model”. Regul Gov 4:203–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gylfason T, Holmström B, Korkman S, Söderström HT, Vihriälä V (2010) Nordics in global crisis. The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy, HelsinkiGoogle Scholar
  23. Hahn R, Kühnen M (2013) Determinants of sustainability reporting: a review of results, trends, theory, and opportunities in an expanding field of research. J Clean Prod 59:5–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hall P, Gingerich DW (2009) Varieties of capitalism and institutional complementarities in the political economy: an empirical analysis. Br J Polit Sci 39(3):449–482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hall P, Soskice D (2001) An introduction to varieties of capitalism. In: Hall P, Soskice D (eds) Varieties of capitalism. The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Halme M, Huse M (1997) The influence of corporate governance, industry and country factors on environmental reporting. Scand J Manag 13(2):137–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Jackson G, Apostolakou A (2010) Corporate social responsibility in Western Europe: an institutional mirror or substitute? J Bus Ethics 94:371–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kampf C (2007) Corporate social responsibility: WalMart, Maersk and the cultural bounds of representation in corporate web sites. Corp Commun Int J 12(1):41–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kang N, Moon J (2012) Institutional complementarity between corporate governance and Corporate Social Responsibility: a comparative institutional analysis of three capitalisms. Socio-Econ Rev 10(1):85–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Karamessini M (2008) Continuity and change in the southern European social model. Int Labour Rev 147(1):43–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Knudsen JS, Brown D (2015) Why governments intervene: exploring mixed motives for public policies on corporate social responsibility. Public Policy Adm 30(1):51–72Google Scholar
  32. Knudsen JS, Moon J, Slager R (2015) Government policies for corporate social responsibility in Europe: a comparative analysis of institutionalisation. Policy Polit 43(1):81–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kolk A, Perego P (2010) Determinants of the adoption of sustainability assurance statements: an international investigation. Bus Strateg Environ 19(3):182–198Google Scholar
  34. Koos S (2012) The institutional embeddedness of social responsibility: a multilevel analysis of smaller firms’ civic engagement in western Europe. Socio-Econ Rev 10:135–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. KPMG (2015) KPMG international survey of corporate responsibility reporting 2013. KPMG, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  36. Legendre S, Coderre F (2013) Determinants of GRI G3 application levels: the case of the fortune global 500. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 20:182–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Maignan I, Ralston DA (2002) Corporate social responsibility in Europe and the US: insights from businesses’ self-presentations. J Int Bus Stud 33(3):497–514CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Martínez-Ferrero J, Garcia-Sanchez IM, Cuadrado-Ballesteros B (2015) Effect of financial reporting quality on sustainability information disclosure. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 22:45–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Matten D, Moon J (2008) «Implicit» and «Explicit» CSR: a conceptual framework for a comparative understanding of corporate social responsibility. Acad Manag Rev 33:40–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Midttun A, Gautesen K, Gjølberg M (2006) The political economy of CSR in western Europe. Corp Gov 6(4):369–385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Minas C, Jacobson D, Antoniu E, McMullan C (2014) Welfare regime, welfare pillar and southern Europe. J Eur Soc Policy 24:135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Mio C, Venturelli A (2013) Non-financial information about sustainable development and environmental policy in the annual reports of listed companies: evidence from Italy and the UK. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 20(6):340–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Molina O, Rhodes M (2008) The reform of social protection systems in mixed market economies. Pôle Sud 28:9–33Google Scholar
  44. Morsing M, Schultz M, Nielsen KU (2008) The ‘Catch 22’ of communicating CSR: findings from a Danish study. J Mark Commun 14(2):97–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Norušis MJ (2012) IBM SPSS statistics 19 advanced statistical procedures companion. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  46. Orij R (2010) Corporate social disclosures in the context of national cultures and stakeholder theory. Acc Audit Acc J 23(7):868–889CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Perez-Batres LA, Doh JP, Miller VV, Pisani MP (2012) Stakeholder pressures as determinants of CSR strategic choice: why do firms choose symbolic versus substantive self-regulatory codes of conduct? J Bus Ethics 110:157–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Rangone M, Solari S (2012) “Southern European” capitalism and the social costs of business enterprise. Studi e Note di Economia 16(1):3–28Google Scholar
  49. Santos S, Rodrigues LL, Branco MC (2016) Online sustainability communication practices of European seaports. J Clean Prod 112:2935–2942CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Steurer R, Martinuzzi A, Margula S (2012) Public policies on CSR in Europe: themes, instruments, and regional differences. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 19:206–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Stittle J, Machota Blas M, Martinez Conesa I (1997) Environmental reporting in Europe: an analysis of UK and Spanish developments. Eur Bus Rev 97(5):215–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Strand R (2011) Toward sustainable sustainability learning: lessons from a US MBA study abroad program in Scandinavia. J Strat Innov Sustain 7(2):41–63Google Scholar
  53. Strand R, Freeman RE, Hockerts K (2015) Corporate social responsibility and sustainability in Scandinavia: an overview. J Bus Ethics 127(1):1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Tagesson T, Blank V, Broberg P, Collin S-O (2009) What explains the extent and content of social and environmental disclosures on corporate websites: a study of social and environmental reporting in Swedish listed corporations. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 16:352–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Tavora I (2012) The southern European social model: familialism and the high rates of female employment in Portugal. J Eur Soc Policy 22(1):63–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. UNGC and Accenture (2013) The UN global compact—Accenture CEO study on sustainability 2013. Accenture, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  57. van der Laan Smith J, Adhikari A, Tondkar RH (2005) Exploring differences in social disclosures internationally: a stakeholder perspective. J Account Public Policy 24(2):123–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Walker M (2010) Accounting for varieties of capitalism: the case against a single set of global accounting standards. Br Acc Rev 42:137–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Young S, Marais M (2012) A multi-level perspective of CSR reporting: the implications of national institutions and industry risk characteristics. Corp Gov Int Rev 20(5):432–450CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Manuel Castelo Branco
    • 1
  • Catarina Delgado
    • 1
  • Carla Marques
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of EconomicsUniversity of PortoPortoPortugal

Personalised recommendations